So you are accepting this definition? I don’t know if that’s correct, I’m asking.
Felice
“There’s always a bigger fish.”
I’d say it’s a fair assessment.Merrium Webster defines repression as “2 a : a process by which unacceptable desires or impulses are excluded from consciousness and left to operate in the unconscious” Perhaps when I use the word repression what I REALLY mean is dissociation, which can be easily defined as my 5 year old sister with her hands over her ears screaming “LA LA LA, I CAN’T HEAR YOU, LA LA LA!” Except in the case of traumatic incident, it’s the person going “la la la, this isn’t happening, this never happened, I won’t remember it, la la la.” How does that sound?
One must have chaos in oneself to give birth to a dancing star. -Nietzche
A few interesting things to look at, from the Skeptic’s Dictionary:
http://skepdic.com/memory.html http://skepdic.com/falsememory.html http://skepdic.com/confab.html http://skepdic.com/repressedmemory.html http://skepdic.com/repress.html
Here’s Dr. Loftus’ site:
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/
I found some information the other day on the False Memories/Repressed Memories issues we were discussing in this in and a related thread.
David had mentioned a case where a woman had “recovered” a memory of her father raping and murdering her best childhood friend some twenty years earlier.
The daugher is Eileen Franklin Lipsker. In 1990, she accused her father, George Franklin, of the crime, basing her accusation on a memory that she claimed she had previously repressed but had recovered. The father was convicted, but in 1995 a federal court, on a habeas corpus petition, set aside the conviction on the grounds of Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, and due-process violations. In 1996 prosecutors declined to retry the case, acknowledging that they did not have enough evidence to convict Franklin for the 1969 murder.
Franklin then filed a lawsuit against, among others, the daughter’s psychiatrist, alleging that she committed perjury at the trial and that she conspired with others, including the prosecutor, to suborn perjury.
A federal appeals court ruled last week that the psychiatrist and another therapist cannot be sued, and that they are entitled to absolute immunity. Further, no Section 1983 (civil rights) claims was adequately pleaded, because of a lack of allegations that the two defendants acted under color of state authority when actually testifying.
Franklin’s attorney is a well-known lawyer in San Francisco, and stated that he is considering a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court.
-Melin
Siamese attack puppet – California
Still neglecting and overprotecting my children